Mower County transcript. [volume] (Lansing, Minn.) 1868-1915, 1887-07-13
A WIFE'S LETTERS

But it cannot be put aside in that flip
pant manner, for it is legal right
that is in8question. and it has recently
been decided in I Paris tribunal that
the husband has the right to open the
letters addressedto his wife. OF course
in America an appeal would be instantly
be taken from this decision, and per-
haps by husbands themselves; for in
this world rights are becoming SO i'm
partially distributed that this privilege
granted to the husband might at once
be extended to the wife. and she would
read all his business correspo ndence,
aud his business is sometimes various
and complicated The Paris decision
must be based upon thefamiliar formula
that man and wife are. one. and that
that one is the husband. IF man has
the right to read all the letters written
to his wife, being his property by rea-
son of his ownership of her, why may
he not have a legal right to know all
that is said to herr The question is
not whether wife ought to receive
letters that her husband may not read,
or listen to talk that he may not hear,
but whether he has sort of lordship
that gives him privileges which she does
not enjoy In our modern notion of
marriage, which is getting itself ex-
pressed in statute law, marriage is sup
posed to rest upon mutual trust and
mutual rights.
In theory the husband and wife are
still one, and there can nothing come in
to the life of one that is not shared by
the other; I'M fact, ifthe marriage is
perfect and the trust absolute, the per-
sonality of each is respected by the
other, and each is freely the judge Ct
what shall be contributed to the COM
mon confidence; and if there are any
concealments, it is well believed that
they are for the mutual good. If
every one were as perfect in the mar
riage relation as those who are reading
these lines, the question of the wife's
letters would never arise. The man,
trusting his wife, would not care to
pry into any little secrets his wife may
have, or bother himself about her cor
respondence; he would know, indeed
that if he had lost her real affection, a
surveillance of her letters could not re-
store it. ~ ~ r. - III -
Perhaps it is a modern notion that
of fr11 or orI ~ .>&
suspicion, of expectation, Of faithfulness
the more there is freedom. At any
rate, the tendency, Notwithstanding
the French deeision.is away from the
common-law suspicion and tyranny to-
ward a higher trust in an enlarged free
dom. And it is certain that the rights
cannot all be on one side and the duties
on the other. II the husband legally
may compel his wife to show him her
letters, the courts will before long
grant the same privilege to the wife.
But, without pressing this point, the
Drawer holds strongly to the sacredness
of correspondence. The letters one re-
ceives are in one sense MOTHS own.
They contain the confessions OF
another soul, the condolences of another
mind, that would be rudely treated if
given any sort of publicity. And while
husband and wife are one to each other,
they are two in the eyes Of other peo-
pie, and it may we'll happen that a
friend will desire to impart something
to discreet woman which she would
not intrust to the babbling husband OF
that woman. Every life must have its
own privacy and its own place of retire
ment. The letter is Of all things the
most personal and intimate thing. Its
bloom is gone when another eye sees it
before the one for which it was intend
ed. Its aroma al escapes when it is
fist opened by another person. One
might as well wear secondhand cloth
ing as get secondhand letter. Here,
then, is a sacred right that ought to be
respected, and can be respected without
any injury to domestic life. The habit
in some families for the members of il
to show each others letters is a most
Disseminating one. 1t is just in the
family, between persons most intimate,
that these delicacies Reconsideration fol
the privacy of each ought to be most
respected; 3D.. s
No one can estimate probably how
much of the refinement, of the delicacy
of feeling, has been lost to the world
by the introduction of the postal-card.
Anything written on a. postaLcard has
no personality; it is. banal, and has as
little power Of charming any one who
receives it as an advertisement in the
newspaper. tits not simply the cheap.
ness of the communication that is vul.
gar, but it is the publicity of it. One
may have perhaps only cents worth
of affection to send, but it seems worth
much more when inclosed in an en-.
velop. We. shave i, no J. doubt then,
that on general principles the French
decision is mistake, and that it tends
rather to vulgarize than to retain the
purity and delicacy of the marriage
relation. And the judges, so long even
as men only occupy the bench, will nc
doubt reverse it when the logica
march of events forces upon them The
question whether the wife may oper
II Us